Women Advocates Cannot Appear With Faces Covered – The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has delivered a landmark judgment clarifying that women advocates cannot appear in court with their faces covered. The ruling, rooted in the Bar Council of India (BCI) rules, underscores the importance of maintaining professional ethics and transparency in legal proceedings.
The case arose during the hearing of a petition filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act. This judgment has set a precedent for adherence to dress codes and professional conduct in the legal fraternity.
The petition in question involved Mohammad Yasin Khan and others, represented by Advocate Salih Pirzada, challenging an order from the trial court. The respondent, Nazia Iqbal, represented by Senior Advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, sought monetary relief under the Domestic Violence Act.
During the proceedings, Advocate Syed Ainain Qadri claimed her fundamental right to appear with her face covered. The court directed the Registrar General to ascertain the legal position regarding this claim, ultimately leading to this significant ruling.
Key Observations by the Court
Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi presided over the matter and referenced the detailed dress code for advocates stipulated in Chapter IV (Part VI) of the Bar Council of India Rules. These rules mandate a uniform professional attire for male and female advocates and disallow clothing that conceals the identity of a lawyer in court.
“The dress code for advocates appearing in court is explicitly detailed in the Bar Council of India Rules, which do not permit any attire that obscures identity,” Justice Kazmi stated.
The court emphasized that compliance with the dress code is vital for maintaining decorum, transparency, and fairness in legal proceedings.
Legal Arguments and Proceedings
The petitioners sought to quash an order from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, which directed the payment of interim maintenance to the respondent and imposed restrictions on the alienation of property.
However, the court ruled that the petitioners should pursue remedies under Section 29 of the Domestic Violence Act by filing an appeal in the Sessions Court. Justice Kazmi reiterated that the High Court’s jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is supervisory and should not be invoked without exhausting statutory remedies.
The court also dismissed the claims of Advocate Qadri, who failed to appear during the subsequent hearing, making further deliberation on her claim unnecessary.
Implications of the Ruling
This ruling holds significant implications for the legal profession:
- Reinforcing Professional Ethics:
The judgment reinforces the importance of adhering to the prescribed dress code, ensuring transparency and accountability in court appearances. - Procedural Clarity for Litigants:
The court clarified that litigants must exhaust statutory remedies before seeking intervention from higher courts, upholding procedural discipline. - Balancing Rights and Institutional Integrity:
By rejecting the claim to appear with a covered face, the court highlighted the need for balancing individual freedoms with professional standards.
Broader Perspective
The ruling has sparked broader discussions about cultural identity, individual rights, and professional obligations in India’s legal framework.
While advocates of the judgment view it as a necessary measure to uphold institutional integrity, critics argue that it may pose challenges for accommodating diverse cultural practices. Nonetheless, the judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining uniformity and transparency in the legal system.
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh’s ruling that women advocates cannot appear with faces covered marks a pivotal moment in Indian jurisprudence. It emphasizes the need for advocates to adhere to professional ethics while respecting procedural discipline in legal proceedings.
This judgment not only strengthens the rule of law but also reinforces the delicate balance between individual freedoms and institutional integrity, paving the way for greater transparency in the legal profession.
